QUESTIONS to pose to the OPG execs re “Spending big on nuclear”

10 Critical Questions for Ontario Power Generation Executives

Cost and Financial Transparency

1. Given that recent nuclear projects in Georgia, Finland, and France experienced cost overruns of 2x, 4x, and 7x their original budgets respectively, what specific safeguards and accountability mechanisms has OPG put in place to prevent similar overruns? If costs do exceed projections, will executives face financial penalties or reduced compensation?
2. Professor Mark Winfield estimates the full nuclear buildout could cost $400 billion versus your projected $73-100 billion. Can you provide a detailed, itemized breakdown of all costs—including decommissioning, waste storage, security, and insurance—and explain why Ontario ratepayers should trust these estimates when global nuclear projects consistently double their budgets?

Technology Choice and Economic Impact

3. Former Prime Minister Chrétien and Premier Harris argue that choosing American BWRX-300 technology over Canadian CANDU will transfer tens of thousands of jobs to the U.S. Why did OPG select foreign technology requiring imported enriched uranium instead of Canadian-designed reactors using Saskatchewan uranium? What is the total job and economic impact of this decision?
4. The IESO study found that renewables paired with batteries can provide dispatchable power for less than half the cost of nuclear. Why is OPG not pursuing a balanced portfolio that includes significantly more renewable energy, especially given that 90% of new global power capacity is now wind and solar?

Project Timeline and Credibility

5. The first SMR was originally promised for 2028 but has already been delayed to 2030—and construction hasn’t even begun. What concrete evidence can you provide that OPG will meet this revised timeline, and what are the financial penalties if you don’t? How many more delays should taxpayers expect?
6. You claim nuclear reactors will last 80-90 years, yet no nuclear plant globally has operated for even 60 years, and no Ontario CANDU has reached 45 years. CANDUs typically require rebuilding at 20-25 years and have operated at most 23 years post-rebuild. How can you justify these lifespan claims, and what happens to ratepayers if reactors need replacement or major refurbishment much sooner than projected?

Alternative Energy Comparison

7. Wind and solar costs have dropped 70-90% in the last decade and are now the cheapest electricity sources in most countries. China added 197 times more solar and wind than nuclear capacity in 2023-24 at half the cost. What analysis has OPG conducted comparing a renewable-heavy portfolio to nuclear, and why are you confident nuclear is the better choice when global trends show the opposite?
8. Solar panels have proven longevity—with 30-year-old installations still producing at 80% capacity and some panels operating for 40+ years while producing near-free electricity (no fuel costs). Meanwhile, nuclear requires constant fuel, security, and maintenance. Can you provide a total lifecycle cost comparison that includes all operating expenses, decommissioning, and waste storage over 60 years?

Risk and Safety

9. A Fukushima-scale accident at Pickering would require evacuating millions of people in a 30km zone extending to Yonge Street. What is OPG’s financial liability for such an event, and since nuclear accidents carry “uninsurable risks,” who ultimately pays if catastrophe occurs? Do executives carry personal liability for safety failures?

10. Ontario hasn’t commissioned a single new renewable energy project in 7.5 years while the rest of the world rapidly transitions to wind and solar. If Ontario’s nuclear bet proves to be “folly” rather than “foresight”—with massive cost overruns, delays, and ratepayers locked into expensive electricity while competitors use cheap renewables—what accountability will OPG executives face? Will there be independent reviews, and can executives be held financially responsible for strategic failures?